Skip to main content

Last Call Review of draft-ietf-teas-mpls-tp-rsvpte-ext-associated-lsp-01
review-ietf-teas-mpls-tp-rsvpte-ext-associated-lsp-01-opsdir-lc-jiang-2015-02-17-00

Request Review of draft-ietf-teas-mpls-tp-rsvpte-ext-associated-lsp
Requested revision No specific revision (document currently at 07)
Type Last Call Review
Team Ops Directorate (opsdir)
Deadline 2015-02-23
Requested 2015-02-10
Authors Fei Zhang , Ruiquan Jing , Rakesh Gandhi
I-D last updated 2015-02-17
Completed reviews Genart Last Call review of -01 by Russ Housley (diff)
Genart Telechat review of -07 by Russ Housley
Secdir Telechat review of -07 by Stephen Kent
Opsdir Last Call review of -01 by Sheng Jiang (diff)
Rtgdir Early review of -01 by Lizhong Jin (diff)
Assignment Reviewer Sheng Jiang
State Completed
Request Last Call review on draft-ietf-teas-mpls-tp-rsvpte-ext-associated-lsp by Ops Directorate Assigned
Reviewed revision 01 (document currently at 07)
Result Has nits
Completed 2015-02-17
review-ietf-teas-mpls-tp-rsvpte-ext-associated-lsp-01-opsdir-lc-jiang-2015-02-17-00
Dear all,

I have reviewed this document as part of the Operational directorate's ongoing
effort to review all IETF documents being processed by the IESG. These comments
were written primarily for the benefit of the operational area directors.
Document editors and WG chairs should treat these comments just like any other
last call comments.

Intended status: Standards Track

Summary: I found it is well written with no big concerns. The document is ready
to be published. A minor comment lists below.

Section 3.2 describes three scenarios. It also states "in each of the
situations described above, both provisioning models are applicable. But, the
description in 3.2.1 and 3.2.2 does not cover all three scenarios. It may leave
some questions on the operational procedures of these undescribed scenarios. My
guess is they are same or similar. Some clarification on this would be helpful.

Best regards,

Sheng